1298 users online (231 members and 1067 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 4 of 90 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 54 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 1336
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    where the big sharks come to play
    Posts
    5,407
    Momma.....with all due respect, Actuaries (those that statistically assign risk for insurance companies) would greatly differ with your first paragraph above in post #44. Just sayin'
    Last edited by ATasteOfHoney; 05-07-2017 at 10:51 PM.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Look, if any of us wanted to mind our own business, we wouldn't be here" (carbuff 8/11/13)

    This post reflects my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy it anywhere else outside of the WebSleuth forum

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,386
    Quote Originally Posted by Fairy1 View Post
    yes, extremists on both sides commit crimes. No surprise there.

    Also, notice the little statistics trick they played. They BEGAN their count of victims on 9/11, and said it is 46 to 28 or something like that.

    What if they had INCLUDED 9/11? Who would be the 'leader' then in the murder count?

    They also exclude many other murders because they decide it was not 'terrorism.' There is no way they could have had only 20-something terrorist killings if they included all to eh recent ones that come to mind.
    Last edited by katydid23; 05-07-2017 at 10:47 PM.
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Up North
    Posts
    6,027
    So here is another issue to consider with the refugee program.

    Often, refugees have passed thru 2 or more countries before being "selected" for "refugee" status and put into the process to come to America. At the FIRST country who provides refuge, they are supposed to be registered and provided refuge, asylum, and services under UNHCR.

    Certainly if they are moved to a SECOND country, AND registered under UNHCR, they should not be eligible, IMO, for "continuous" refugee status to "hope" to come to America, just because they want to. And if that process includes more than a dozen years of living in comfort and safety (NOT in a squalid refugee camp), then I think that the original explanation/ rationale for their "refugee" status no longer applies. They should go through the usual process to immigrate to America.

    Let me give one example. And keep in mind that while this situation was briefly prominent in the news cycle, it is representative of THOUSANDS of people who have been given "refugee" status.

    The parents of the OSU radical islamic terrorist "stabber" (designated as an act of islamic terrorism by the FBI), Abdul Razak Ali Artan, are originally from Somalia. The father claimed persecution, and fled with his wife and kids to Kenya. The family remained in Kenya for several years, likely in a refugee camp (registered under UNHCR), where Artan was reportedly born-- although the records available to the public are a bit fuzzy about the details. (He is suspected to be much older than his family claimed him to be, but that's another controversy.)

    The family in Kenya, after several years, then received permission and assistance to go to Pakistan (a country of refuge under UNHCR). Buuuuuttttt......Pakistan "kind of, sort of" doesn't want to "keep" the refugees they have willingly taken, and accepted money to support.

    Asylum System in Pakistan

    Pakistan is not a party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees/1967 Protocol and has also not enacted any national legislation for the protection of refugees nor established procedures to determine the refugee status of persons who are seeking international protection within its territory. Such persons are therefore treated in accordance with the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

    In the absence of a national refugee legal framework, UNHCR conducts refugee status determination under its mandate (Statute of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees adopted by the General Assembly Resolution 428 (V) of 14 December 1950) and on behalf of the Government of Pakistan in accordance with the 1993 Cooperation Agreement between the Government of Pakistan and UNHCR. Pakistan generally accepts UNHCR decisions to grant refugee status and allows asylum-seekers (who are still undergoing the procedure) as well as recognized refugees to remain in Pakistan pending identification of a durable solution.
    http://unhcrpk.org/about/asylum-system-in-pakistan/

    Soooo.....Pakistan kind of plays it both ways-- "yes we will take refugees, and support them, and give them sanctuary, and work with UNHCR, but if we can figure out how to offload them to another country, or they really want to go to America, we really want to make that happen."

    So America says, "no problem Pakistan, we will take pretty much anyone you want to offload. And we will register and process those people as 'refugees' (not immigrants) who were persecuted in their homeland, despite 14 years of comfortable and safe living, and 2 countries of admission for asylum under UNHCR."

    While in Pakistan, Artan's father eventually "geographically separated" from his wife and children (no one really knows the whole story), and went alone to Dubai. And there his story ends. What is available suggests that he never returned to either Pakistan, or his family, and does not remain in contact with them. The wife and kids lived in a very upper middle class town in Pakistan for 14 years! Artan grew up there, lived a life typical of most urban Pakistani teenagers, and attended a private, fairly "upscale" Pakistani high school. At some point toward the end of the 14 years in Pakistan, while registered now in 2 different countries as a "refugee" under UNHCR, Artan's mother and 6 of her children received permission to come to America, again, as "refugees". What exactly were they fleeing in Pakistan?

    The family processed rapidly thru the port of arrival in New York, and went on to Dallas, where they were received as "refugees". The family spent 24 days in Dallas, getting signed in officially as refugees with the "resettlement NGO" then was quickly "released" to go to Ohio to join a community of Somali refugees. The family settled in the Columbus, Ohio area, and received a wealth of social services, and expensive resources (Artan went to community college, almost certainly for free, then transferred to Ohio State.) Artan was here in the U.S. barely 36 months, during which he became radicalized, and planned and carried out the stabbing and car attack at OSU.

    Artan may have never set foot in Somalia, and he was over age 18 when he became a "refugee" to come to America, under "family unification" policies.

    The entire process for African refugees, IMO, is rife with corruption and political bureaucracy, that has absolutely nothing at all to do with the need for "refugee" status. The family unification program, in particular, was found to be so laden with corruption and deceit, that it was shut down all together for 4 years while officials sorted out why only 20% of the children were genetically related to the parents who were granted refugee status.

    https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/prm/re...008/112760.htm

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Fairy1 View Post
    White extremists? lol

    I thought Time went belly up. Must be some other liberal publication I'm thinking of.

    We've certainly got our own problems in this country with U.S. citizen violence of every conceivable stripe. The question is, why in heaven's name are we so eager to import more?

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    9,324
    Quote Originally Posted by Momma2cam View Post
    Got it. I can respect that opinion in regards to the immigration process and I don't completely disagree. I see the value in that as it minimizes the potential strain on resources once immigrants are in the US. Where my opinion differs is that I don't think wealth should be the primary deciding factor in allowing all immigrants in. My family immigrated from Ireland legally as well and luckily they had the means.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    I don't feel that poor refugee's should be prevented from coming to the US. They just need to be properbly vetted.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally Posted by Fairy1 View Post
    Moonbat logic at it's finest-- we have crazy American citizens, so what's a few more?

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,584
    Quote Originally Posted by ATasteOfHoney View Post
    Momma.....with all due respect, Actuaries (those that statistically assign risk for insurance companies) would greatly differ with your first paragraph above. Just sayin'
    Can you elaborate? Is it not true that every day we put ourselves at risk just by leaving our home? Our risk of being struck by lightning in 1 year is 1 in 700,000. The risk of being killed by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion. The risk of dying in a car accident is 1 in 47,000. The risk of being killed by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion.

    The odds of winning the lottery is 1 in 175 million. I think I'll play the lottery tomorrow after this discussion.

    Night all.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    3,069
    Quote Originally Posted by RANCH View Post
    My grandparents left Canada after World War II and immigrated to the US. They had to have American sponsors, jobs lined up and a certain amount of cash before they could come in.
    It worked for my family then and it can work for today's immigrants.
    Exactly! My coworker went through this to bring his wife here from Canada 5 years ago.
    He had to fill out a ream of paper and his parents had to "co-sign" for her (my term for sponsorship, lol) and agree to support them financially if he lost his job. The whole process took two years.
    All you need is love and. . . .(fill in the blank)

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,584
    Quote Originally Posted by RANCH View Post
    I don't feel that poor refugee's should be prevented from coming to the US. They just need to be properbly vetted.
    But, what does that mean? What would you add to the current process?

    https://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases...017/266447.htm

    "The USRAP has over thirty years of experience screening and admitting refugees. No traveler to the United States is subject to more rigorous security screening than the refugees the U.S. Government considers for admission. Only after the U.S. Government’s rigorous and lengthy security screening process has been completed and an applicant is not found to pose a threat does the U.S. Government grant that individual refugee admission to the U.S. Security screening of all refugees involves multiple U.S. agencies, including the Departments of State, Homeland Security (DHS), and Defense, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, The National Counterterrorism Center, the Terrorist Screening Center, and two federal intelligence agencies."

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,386
    Quote Originally Posted by Fairy1 View Post
    HOLD ON...wait a minute. I call BS on this article.

    here is what they give as their super scientific total body count of Jihadists in US since 9/11:


    In their June study, the foundation decided to examine groups "engaged in violent extremist activity" and found that white extremists were by far the most dangerous. They pointed to the recent Emanuel AME Church shooting in Charleston, S.C., and the 2012 attack on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, as well as many lesser-known attacks on Jewish institutions and on police. They found that 48 people were killed by white terrorists, while 26 were killed by radical Islamists, since Sept. 11.

    TWENTY SIX were killed by radical Islamists?

    How many were killed in the Pulse nightclub? FIFTY

    So that one incident right there beats out the white rightwing killers.
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn


  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by RANCH View Post
    I don't feel that poor refugee's should be prevented from coming to the US. They just need to be properbly vetted.
    I'm not sure about that. We need to figure out how much money we're actually spending propping these folks up, how it's being spent, and for how long. I'm really tired of taxpayer dollars going to programs the taxpayers know nothing about. Refugee resettlement appears to be a very lucrative industry for many people, all at taxpayer expense. I've seen information suggesting refugee children are allotted many goodies the kids of U.S. taxpayers may or may not be able to afford.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    9,324
    Quote Originally Posted by Momma2cam View Post
    But, what does that mean? What would you add to the current process?

    https://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases...017/266447.htm

    "The USRAP has over thirty years of experience screening and admitting refugees. No traveler to the United States is subject to more rigorous security screening than the refugees the U.S. Government considers for admission. Only after the U.S. Government’s rigorous and lengthy security screening process has been completed and an applicant is not found to pose a threat does the U.S. Government grant that individual refugee admission to the U.S. Security screening of all refugees involves multiple U.S. agencies, including the Departments of State, Homeland Security (DHS), and Defense, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, The National Counterterrorism Center, the Terrorist Screening Center, and two federal intelligence agencies."

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    What I mean is if a refugee can't be vetted because the country of origin can't provide the necessary information for a proper security screening then the refugee doesn't come into the United States.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    where the big sharks come to play
    Posts
    5,407
    Quote Originally Posted by Momma2cam View Post
    Can you elaborate? Is it not true that every day we put ourselves at risk just by leaving our home? Our risk of being struck by lightning in 1 year is 1 in 700,000. The risk of being killed by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion. The risk of dying in a car accident is 1 in 47,000. The risk of being killed by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion.

    The odds of winning the lottery is 1 in 175 million. I think I'll play the lottery tomorrow after this discussion.

    Night all.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    Risk & odds making is a complicated business. For the sake of not deviating too far off the thread topic; here goes:
    People in Michigan have less risk than I do from dying from a shark attack. People where I live have a significantly greater chance of being hit by lightening since I live in the "lightening capital of the US". People who live in a rural farm town in Minnesota who suddenly get "elected" to have a Somali group of 2,000 literally dumped at their small town doorstep......well, there's going to be a problem with language, skill sets, shelter, cultural differences, monetary/survival issues, etc which equates to a sudden spike in crimes. Because there really is no assimilation plan & who knows if the refugees have a desire to assimilate?
    It's about controlled risks.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Look, if any of us wanted to mind our own business, we wouldn't be here" (carbuff 8/11/13)

    This post reflects my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy it anywhere else outside of the WebSleuth forum

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    9,772
    Quote Originally Posted by katydid23 View Post
    yes, extremists on both sides commit crimes. No surprise there.

    Also, notice the little statistics trick they played. They BEGAN their count of victims on 9/11, and said it is 46 to 28 or something like that.

    What if they had INCLUDED 9/11? Who would be the 'leader' then in the murder count?

    They also exclude many other murders because they decide it was not 'terrorism.' There is no way they could have had only 20-something terrorist killings if they included all to eh recent ones that come to mind.
    Indeed. Let's not forget Timothy McVeigh in 1995:

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Timothy-McVeigh

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Southeast US
    Posts
    21
    I'll piggy back here on what Momma2cam shared...I use to volunteer for a refugee service organization. I learned so much about the process and the experience that these people endure. It is often a perilous and dangerous trek to make it to the safety of a refugee camp; enduring weather, physical threats, fear, uncertainty (I hope there never comes a time in my life where I experience the things I've been told about). Once in the camp, a refugee is there indefinitely waiting for a sponsor country to accept them. They are heavily scrutinized and interviewed dozens of times over a period of many years (often to ensure their answers are consistent), if they are selected for the USA, they will go through a CIA background check, a medical check (if any disqualifying condition is presented they will barred from entry). Depending on what part of the world they are from, they may not have any English ability and it is impossible to know which home country they will find to study a language and prepare in advance- One of my families spent eight years in camp before they were picked up for the US. After everything comes back in order 18 to 24 months roughly- they fly over to the US and are sent to their host state. The US government provides their airfare to come to the US and three months-- THREE MONTHS of assistance. That's IT. Sink or swim. That's why these organizations (non government) are so important the process. They are charitable groups and provide these families with jobs, language support, cultural assistance, furniture, anything you can think of to navigate their new lives. It is scary, it tough, it is by no means easy- no matter how well off or middle class or whatever status these people had in their lives before it is a humbling and challenging experience- they live extremely frugally and it is stressful having something completely foreign to you on every level thrust at you quickly. I can't think of anything that could really truly prepare someone for what the experience is going to be like. There's a gravity to it. I sensed from the people I met that they felt grateful to be alive because their situations had become some bleak and dangerous...I understood that they experienced things that they may never be able to articulate- these people are war vets, but they aren't soldiers- they are regular everyday people; men, women, children who are innocent

    As far as out vetting goes, after 9/11 they overhauled it and made it extreme. Out of all the Western countries, the US is the the most difficult to gain entry. However, given that we go to great lengths to vet people who want to resettle here, or to become a resident alien, or to become a citizen--The easiest way to gain entry to the US is via our tourist visa program. Aside from being an simple reason to come to the US, it is easy to overstay the visa when it expires. We have laws in place already to remove people when they do this, but over time it hasn't been widely enforced and then you turn around and have a non documented population in the millions!!! Seems like, it would make sense to enforce those expiration dates.

    One last thing, we talk about resources. Land, clean air, clean water- but, sometimes people forget that human capital is resource. You have to have people to fill jobs and you have to have a lot of diversity in your workforce. We fall short on the physical labor demands and we fall short on the high tech and medical field demands. Then, we have some people in this country who are opposed expanding public education. Well, you need talent from somewhere and if we aren't willing to invest in our citizenry to meet the demands of our society then we have to expand our pool of resources.

Page 4 of 90 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 54 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. More problems caused by illegal immigration
    By reb in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 01-16-2008, 10:24 AM